Gamburtsev Mountains

I just ran across this interesting article http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/11/081106-antarctica-mountains.html  I thought someone here must have commented on them at some point but the search comes up empty.  Could these mountains be the Ice Wall?

Though I don't believe Antarctica is the 'rim continent', this is nonetheless a fascinating article.

To be an Ice wall, you generally have to be above ground, not buried beneath miles of ice.

You know those pictures in the article were taken with satellites?

Obviously Nat Geo is working hand in hand with the Conspiracy.

To be an Ice wall, you generally have to be above ground, not buried beneath miles of ice.

NO, to be an Ice Wall it would need to be a wall of ice.  The Ice Wall theory hypothesizes that the wall is actually a mountain range covered in ice (I think, I need to read that again).

Obviously Nat Geo is working hand in hand with the Conspiracy.

Quote from: flyingmonkey on February 08, 2010, 05:59:02 PM

To be an Ice wall, you generally have to be above ground, not buried beneath miles of ice.

NO, to be an Ice Wall it would need to be a wall of ice.  The Ice Wall theory hypothesizes that the wall is actually a mountain range covered in ice (I think, I need to read that again).

How do the ice guards guard it, if it is underground? Not much of a vantage point there. Plus, isn't the point of it to keep the atmosphere and hold the ocean's in (lol)?  I don't see how it can do this underground, (not that I can see this happening above ground either.)

The mountain range is under ice, not under the ground.

The mountain range is under ice, not under the ground.

So if you are standing on the ground and the ground is made up of ice...

...and under it there are mountains...

...then the mountains are underground.

If there was ice in middle of a mountain you wouldn't say the mountain is around the ice would you?

I'm not standing on it, I'm not even in Antarctica.

And even if she was, she wouldn't be standing on the ground, she'd be standing on the ice. Which is on top of the ground (mountains)

Thank you, d00gz!

I don't agree with your OP.

I just think he was a dumbass.

You'll believe someday, it happens to all of us!

And even if she was, she wouldn't be standing on the ground, she'd be standing on the ice. Which is on top of the ground (mountains)

She would in fact be standing on a warm fur rug inside a cosy tent I would provide, with glasses of champagne for both of us, and some warm massage oil. 

Quote from: d00gz on February 10, 2010, 08:12:57 AM

And even if she was, she wouldn't be standing on the ground, she'd be standing on the ice. Which is on top of the ground (mountains)

She would in fact be standing on a warm fur rug inside a cosy tent I would provide, with glasses of champagne for both of us, and some warm massage oil. 

Then you'd know the earth is flat!

I don't agree with your OP.

I just think he was a dumbass.

So i am a dumb-ass because reference the ground as material I would be standing on whether ice, dirt, the 59th floor in a sky scraper.

Yeah, the 59th floor of a skyscraper isn't the ground.  The "ground" floor is on the ground.

Yeah, the 59th floor of a skyscraper isn't the ground.  The "ground" floor is on the ground.

Ok... I honestly don't are it was a good article either way

Quote from: d00gz on February 10, 2010, 09:11:36 AM

I don't agree with your OP.

I just think he was a dumbass.

So i am a dumb-ass because reference the ground as material I would be standing on whether ice, dirt, the 59th floor in a sky scraper.

Yes. The ice is a temporary state of being. If it were to suddenly get hot... It wouldn't be there.

National Geographic doesn't know their ass from their elbows.

The picture they claim is a satellite photo is not a satellite photo at all.

It's from NASA's World Wind project, a 3D model.

http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/screenshots-bm.html

Ah so only data from NASA that has the Tom Bishop stamp of approval is allowed to be used as evidence of anything?

National Geographic doesn't know their ass from their elbows.

The picture they claim is a satellite photo is not a satellite photo at all.

It's from NASA's World Wind project, a 3D model.

http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/screenshots-bm.html

I'm fairly certain World Wind uses satellite images.


What I was getting at with the underground mountains, was that an ice wall that is supposedly the barrier for the Earth, cannot be beneath miles of flat walkable ice.
Just because they are mountains, doesn't mean they are a wall.

Though I don't believe Antarctica is the 'rim continent', this is nonetheless a fascinating article.

What is on the edge of the world, then? The magical land with mammoths in it?

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on February 08, 2010, 05:35:37 PM

Though I don't believe Antarctica is the 'rim continent', this is nonetheless a fascinating article.

What is on the edge of the world, then? The magical land with mammoths in it?

Haven't been there. Who knows, there may not be an edge.

National Geographic doesn't know their ass from their elbows.

The picture they claim is a satellite photo is not a satellite photo at all.

It's from NASA's World Wind project, a 3D model.

http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/screenshots-bm.html

OMG they had to edit the images to remove clouds and allow 3D navigation and such or else it wouldn't make much sense.  Call the cops, this must prove that all of the data is fake in the same way as every model on every magazine cover is nonexistant and part of the conpiracy because they photoshop them to make them fit whatever image they are trying to project.

Good God man, don't you ever get tired of spewing this garbage?

(these pictures are fake! Nat Geo = dummy)
bzzzzz..... plop


(no they arnt fake, thyr satellite)


(yes they are, look the site says its a combination of satellite imagery-pshh psuedolite-and computer data proving it is fake.  I'm taking my prize!)

Quote from: Tom Bishop on February 11, 2010, 01:08:15 AM

National Geographic doesn't know their ass from their elbows.

The picture they claim is a satellite photo is not a satellite photo at all.

It's from NASA's World Wind project, a 3D model.

http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/screenshots-bm.html

I'm fairly certain World Wind uses satellite images.


What I was getting at with the underground mountains, was that an ice wall that is supposedly the barrier for the Earth, cannot be beneath miles of flat walkable ice.
Just because they are mountains, doesn't mean they are a wall.

Just because we refer to it as the Ice Wall, doesn't mean it looks like a wall in your house.  The mountain range is just under 9,000 feet high and that is before you take into consideration that it is buried beneath about 2,000 feet of ice.  The barrier for the earth can be beneath miles of flat walkable ice, you can walk across the top of a dam, it's not such a stretch that you'd be able walk across the top of the Ice Wall.  Also, this mountain range might not be the entire wall, but part of the wall.  If you take into consideration that the earth might be bigger than we actually know, perhaps this mountain range is only the inside edge of the wall.   

Also, if the Pope is a catholic, and Cowgirl is hot, i require links to pics to see for myself, i believe that is the Zetetic way?

You don't need pics. Zeteticism makes an exception for Space Cowgirl!

National Geographic doesn't know their ass from their elbows.

The picture they claim is a satellite photo is not a satellite photo at all.

It's from NASA's World Wind project, a 3D model.

http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/screenshots-bm.html

You're a knob. It is a texture overlay of a satellite image on top of a 3d rendering.

Just because we refer to it as the Ice Wall, doesn't mean it looks like a wall in your house.  The mountain range is just under 9,000 feet high and that is before you take into consideration that it is buried beneath about 2,000 feet of ice.  The barrier for the earth can be beneath miles of flat walkable ice, you can walk across the top of a dam, it's not such a stretch that you'd be able walk across the top of the Ice Wall.  Also, this mountain range might not be the entire wall, but part of the wall.  If you take into consideration that the earth might be bigger than we actually know, perhaps this mountain range is only the inside edge of the wall.  

You still don't get my point.

I don't mean walk across the top as in along it's length, I mean that people have gone from one side of this so called wall to the other by walking on the ice that is covering it.

The range is so much a wall as an underwater trench is a wall.
It doesn't stop anything.

The entire theory of the ice wall requires that there is a actual wall of ice/mountains keeping the atmosphere in place and not leaking off into space.


You range currently looks like this:


_________________   <- land we walk on, the known surface of Antarctica at that point.
           few
       thousand
           feet
_____/\/\/\/\______   <- Your "ground level" where your mountains are, you'll probably only be able to see the peaks above the surface.


If we can cross this wall so easily and record exactly how big Antarctica is via navigation and walking from one side to the other, how can there be a mass amount of land hiding somewhere behind a wall that only exists beneath the surface.


ED: Here you go, hopefully you understand now.



Oh look, no hidden Garden of Eden or anything.

The Ice Wall does not hold the atmosphere in, you should read the FAQ.